Brackman was right, he had position. Should have been a foul.
Poor Kendrick. It would take a fairly secure person to be able to laugh at a joke like that at their expense. Serves as proof that a room full of guys who play a childs game for profit and have too much time on their hands is probably a dangerous thing.
Brother, that Brackman is one large American. His nickname ought to be “XL.”
As for the Kyle Kendrick story, the Yankees could use a little of that kind of subversive behavior to help take themselves a little less seriously and enjoy the game like they used to as kids. Before they became museum pieces, Yankee Old Timers used to play pranks on each other all the time. Is it possible that the last true prankster was Nettles?
Tomorrow is media vulture day with Andy Pettitte. They’ll ask the same questions over and over again never realizing that they’re repetitious. They’ll pry and dig for the slighest thing as long as it makes up a column.
Posadaâ€™s a funny cat. If you want a colorful Yankee quote, heâ€™s the guy to see. He said we need an ace, but now he says that Wangâ€™s the ace. â€œWang is a No. 1 anywhere,â€ Jorge Posada said. â€œI have no doubt about that.â€ (Feinsand of Daily News)
I thought I read yesterday that Posada said that Joba should be a starter. Mustâ€™ve had tired eyes, because now heâ€™s saying that heâ€™s definitely a reliever. Read the last line. Classic Posada. http://www.nydailynews.com/spo.....joba_.html
Itâ€™ll be interesting to see who Jorge thinks has the best â€œstuffâ€ at the end of the season. He said Hughes after his first ST. Then he got to catch Joba in the bigs. Then you have the prospects. And Krazy Kyle. (end of repost)
My point is that, Posada probably let it go and there should be no lingering problems with Kyle. He knows that Girardi wants to make it work with Kyle. Posada will be on board for that.
Thanks Mel. I think Farnsworth is going to be an important part of the bullpen this year. Anything Posada can do to make him feel more comfortable will help. I just hope he doesnt think he can get by just throwing his flat fastball. He needs to use his slider more.
This is going to sound silly…But…My wife and I are going to Italy with friends. But the catch is that it’s April 4-17. I figured that I would miss only about 8 games at that point in the season, but it turns out that this year there are no off days then. So I miss 14.
I had been rationalizing that it is Italy, after all. But after reading the blog for just the start of spring training, and then reading Rebecca’s blog about her trip to Cooperstown, I think I am definitely going to miss Yankee baseball. I hope I can get ESPN, or at least Internet access for the blog.
Sign up for mlb.tv for the month so you can watch the games. I believe there will be a 5 hour time difference so you can watch the games starting at midnight for the 7:00 games. Although I don’t know if you just want to sit around and watch baseball when you’re in italy
LOL. Reading your story, I was thinking that your dilemma was between being a dutiful companion with your wife on a romantic trip or finding a way to watch Yankee games online. Then I got to the end to find out that you’ll be jonesing for the blog. That’s a hoot.
Be a good husband and stay away from the computer. Otherwise, if you remind me, I’ll do an recap in one post for you. So you can sneak away to “check your e-mail”.
Anyway, why not try to get up to Cooperstown before you leave? Also, last spring I missed all of April and the beginning of May when I was in London, so missing fourteen games really isn’t all that bad.
Joe from Long Islan Re: Your Italy trip … I’ve been to Europe 1/2 dozen times (Italy, France, England, Ireland, Greece, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Prague, Istanbull). Italy is my favorite country …. Mediterranean climate, unmatched history, spectacular sites/scenery.
I also went during baseball season (several times). Here’s a tip …. forget baseball and EXPERIENCE the country. Don’t even check the scores – your enjoyment of your vacation becomes dependent on the success of the Yankees. They’ll be there when you get back. There is not enough time in the day to fully embrace Italy.
You will never regret putting the Yankees on a back burner for two weeks in April.
Was watching ESPN News and the reporter said that they will have full coverage of Andy Pettitte’s arrival at Legends (Steinbrenner) field and his press conference tomorrow. He added that they will not miss a minute! Tomorrow is going to be a media circus for Andy. I hope that he is ready.
“Big deal. Waxman and Cummings had the facts on their side.”
It is a legitimate – - if not dispositive – - issue. The fact that Mitchell’s firm made a substantial contribution to Waxman’s campaign ($5K) and a less sizable gift to Cummings ($750) two years ago is a legit gripe when they were the two most aggressive Clemens detractors, and especially since Waxman is the committee chair. It could reasonably be argued that Waxman’s and Cummings’ hostility to Clemens was the result of loyalty to Mitchell as much as the facts. I know they didn’t create the need for money in campaigns, but taking the check from DLA Piper fairly raises the question.
It is a legitimate – - if not dispositive – - issue. The fact that Mitchellâ€™s firm made a substantial contribution to Waxmanâ€™s campaign ($5K) and a less sizable gift to Cummings ($750) two years ago is a legit gripe when they were the two most aggressive Clemens detractors, and especially since Waxman is the committee chair. It could reasonably be argued that Waxmanâ€™s and Cummingsâ€™ hostility to Clemens was the result of loyalty to Mitchell as much as the facts. I know they didnâ€™t create the need for money in campaigns, but taking the check from DLA Piper fairly raises the question.
Yet the available facts, particularly paragraph 6. of Pettitte’s affidavit;
the contradictions in Clemens’s testimony, his incredible denial of having prior notice by Mitchell or his agents or the MLBPA of having been informed that he would be mentioned in the Mitchell Report; his meeting with the nanny who was at Canseco’s which at the very least raised an appearance of impropriety issue, if not witness tampering; and the medical expert’s report that at least made it possible that he had an abscess in 1998; provided Waxman and Cummings a reasonable basis for taking the position they did toward Clemens in the hearing.
I’ll grant you this point: They should have disclosed those contributions in the hearings, but similarly, I think it would also be incumbent on Clemens, Hardin, and any Republican Congress(wo)men who had any dealings with any Republican Party officials who may have made entreaties on Clemens’s behalf to any member of the committee before the hearing.
One more thing: Could anything have been more improper than Clemens meeting with committee members before the hearings?
In sum, the entire system is tainted and I’m not sure that the contributions to Waxman and Cummings are the most egregious example
“One more thing: Could anything have been more improper than Clemens meeting with committee members before the hearings?”
Let’s take a step back and look at this clearly.
1. Clemens is not just presumed innocent, he is not in fact charged with anything.
2. A Congressional Hearing is not a trial. It is not a judicial proceeding. Every forum has different rules. It would have been improper in the extreme to meet with prospective jurors or judges before hand, but this was not a trial. The hearing was to gather facts regarding the Mitchell Report’s accuracy because Clemens so stridently challenged the sections pertaining to him. Congress was ostensibly trying to determine whether they could rely on the report or whether it was too flawed. It was only some of us in the public that wished this was a trial and a final determination of the truth, but in fact it was not.
3. No rule or restriction prevents or makes improper the meetings Clemens had with the members before hand. See point 1 above about not being charged with anything and point 2, this was not a trial. As far as anyone knows Clemens was there to not just make his position known, but to hear what the members had to say too. Some weren’t very kind to Roger. The members also had the right to decline the meeting and at least one did I believe.
4. Much as it pains me to say, Pettitte has shown that he can be as petty and self-interested as anyone. He held back on his initial acknowledgment of guilt in the Mitchell Report judging by his most recent admission of his 2004 HGH use. This latest admission opens the door to an investigation of that HGH-dealing high school buddy of his. I hope for Andy’s sake this is the end of the revelations, but I have no idea anymore. But his recollections and credibility no longer meet the gold standard.
5. No I’m not blind. I don’t think Roger is clean. But he does not have to convict himself.
1. Correct, but since Clemens currently faces no loss of life, liberty, or property, the presumption of innocence is not really operational for the reasons you stated. Also, he did not have to attend that hearing.
2. Yet members of Congress who received an autograph from Clemens may have broken the law, at least according to a recent story in the NYT. In any event, there are legal standards, and there are ethical standards, and meeting in with a prospective witness who is attempting to lobby members of Congress immediately prior to a hearing raises ethical concerns.
3. See point 2.
4. Pettitte, for all his faults, is far more credible than Clemens based on the facts that have been adduced, especially when you consider that Pettitte’s testimony buttresses McNamee’s credibility on the specific issue of who he shot up. When you then take those facts in tandem with Knoblach’s testimony, the weight of the evidence strongly suggests that Pettitte is telling the truth and that Clemens is lying.
5. IMO, Clemens’s is convicting himself (not in the literal sense, but in the court of public opinion) with his ridiculous excuses (his wife did HGH not, him), as well as the contradictions in his statements.